Evidence of meeting #63 for Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was interference.
A video is available from Parliament.
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Okay.
Every government has been informed of this, is that correct?
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
They all chose to ignore the warnings from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, is that correct?
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
They were infiltrated by agents of influence at the invitation of the Chinese government, is that correct?
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Right.
As you said earlier, the governments made debatable decisions concerning these cases of interference.
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
Oh yes.
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Right.
So every government up to now has been part of the problem.
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Right.
You said that a law should perhaps be enacted. Can Hong Kong's National Security Act, which was enacted in 2020, serve as a model for this?
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
Are you talking about Hong Kong or Australia?
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
In the case of Australia, it was in 2018.
Yes, I think it's a good start. That act has been in force in Australia for five years, and its intelligence services are able to use it. It can tell us a bit about the upgrades we could make to our laws. Ordinarily, all laws include a sunset clause, which provides for a review every five years or so. That is exactly the time that has elapsed since that act came into force in Australia. We could certainly look to that law.
The United States and England have also passed appropriate legislation that we could look to for enacting a law on the Canadian model.
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
That's great.
You also say that the investigative office that was proposed this week is not suitable because it is not independent.
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
That's correct.
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
So the office should be independent of the government and of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
That's it.
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
It could be done in the same way as with the Office of the Auditor General of Canada: a person would be appointed by the House of Commons after being approved by all members of Parliament. That person would report to the House of Commons.
The purpose of the investigation office would be to restore the integrity that our democratic system needs, whether in the eyes of our international allies or of our fellow Canadians. It is very important that the office be independent and maneuverable. It must also have the appropriate powers for conducting investigations. As Mr. Wilczynski said, the person in charge would ensure transparency, which is greatly lacking at present, as was said earlier. For too long, this lack of transparency has prevented Canada from issuing warnings to the public.
In fact, I recall an incident involving the Security Intelligence Review Committee. When the Canadian Security Intelligence Service wanted to approach major corporations to pass on warnings, somewhat like what Britain's MI5 and MI6 do once a year at a national conference, the Security Intelligence Review Committee did the opposite and reprimanded CSIS, telling it that it should only inform the government. We have done that for 30 years, but it has produced no results.
9:30 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Do you think artificial intelligence is going to present a new challenge, in terms of interference or controlling it?
9:30 a.m.
Former Chief of the Asia-Pacific Unit, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, As an Individual
Yes, the challenge is going to be huge. Artificial intelligence is going to enable a country that wants to go on the offensive and engage in interference to get much more information and to much more easily identify the targets to attack in this country.
March 31st, 2023 / 9:35 a.m.
Bloc
René Villemure Bloc Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you, Mr. Juneau-Katsuya.
Mr. Chiu, during the last parliament, you introduced Bill C-282, An Act to establish the Foreign Influence Registry.
What happened to that bill?
9:35 a.m.
Former Member of Parliament, As an Individual
Nothing. It just sat on the House of Commons floor, and with the Prime Minister pulling the plug on the 43rd Parliament, it just went away.
9:35 a.m.
Bloc